055 DDG Large Destroyer Thread

[Solaris]

Sigh.

First of all, 052D is not "one generation behind" the world's largest destroyer designs. Generations are typically defined by the technology of the ship,not the size. In that sense, 052D is in some ways half a generation ahead than the ships you are talking about like burke, atago, sejong or ticos, given it uses a next generation APAR and a more modern and more flexible VLS.

An AESA is capable of potentially greater functionality than a PESA, and all other things being equal, you would definitely prefer the AESA. But it really boils down to the software in this regard, and the US has had decades of experience and over a dozen iterations of Aegis upgrades to go by. So I wouldn't automatically give greater credence to an AESA over a PESA. This is a hard case to argue for either viewpoint however, since we will probably never truly know the capabilities of either navy's software. People like to call the 052C/D class China's "Aegis" warships, but are they really? We'll have to see.

In terms of VLS flexibility, I see only the capability to cold launch as an additional benefit of the concentric launchers. But this could simply represent the PLAN's transition from cold launch to hot launch as its missile motors have presumably become more reliable, yet the existence of both hot and cold-launched rounds in the PLAN inventory necessitates this flexibility. A problem the USN does not have. Besides that, in terms of the range of rounds that can be fired, I don't see a difference.

Why do you want to put a Sampson on a >10k t ship? The selling point of the Sampson is to have a lightweight AESA radar which can be put on a higher position, compared to other radar solutions, to increase the max radar horizon. But you pay it with less TR modules and peak power compared to other AESA solutions.

A four-panel X-band + S/L band long search radar would be the better and international prefered solution.

The benefit of the topmast position is, as you mentioned, the increased max radar horizon, which is obviously advantageous for a number of reasons. You forget that the PLAN is apparently using ARH air defense missiles, resulting in an S-band + UHF-band solution for its 052C's and 052D's, not the Western X/S-band combo. This means that the S-band radar is being used for things like midcourse guidance updates, horizon search, and limited air search while the UHF (Yagi) radar is being used for volume search and early warning. In the role that the PLAN is using this type of radar for, a topmast position would dramatically enhance its function, since it is more or less analogous to the X-band radars in Western navies, which you do see mounted high up on the ship. The Sampson has a range of 400 km and apparently can track several hundred targets, which does not seem to me to be less than what a PLAN AESA S-band is likely to be capable of. Of course the software is the key, as I mentioned above.

 

[by78]

No surprises regarding the 'usual specs' such as sensors and weapons.

What I find most interesting are the force-multipliers, the software, the combat information system, and the such:

1) Standardization of onboard systems allows for easy upgrade.
2) The ability to assume tactical command of fleet, submarine, and air combat formations. Think USS Blue Ridge.
3) New generation combat information system enables significantly reduced operator workload.
4) Data fusion from onboard, land-based, and space-based sensors. Real-time situation awareness.
5) 'Link-16' equivalent secure datalink.
6) Heavy emphasis on electronic warfare and submarine warfare.
7) 055 is intended for 'far sea' defense, going far beyond the island chains, even to polar regions. Capable of fire support/land attack.

That last point is the most significant because it speaks to China's intentions: how she sees herself projecting her power and protecting her interests. The pieces of the grand puzzle are falling into place.

Interesting times...

 

[Blitzo]

An AESA is capable of potentially greater functionality than a PESA, and all other things being equal, you would definitely prefer the AESA. But it really boils down to the software in this regard, and the US has had decades of experience and over a dozen iterations of Aegis upgrades to go by. So I wouldn't automatically give greater credence to an AESA over a PESA. This is a hard case to argue for either viewpoint however, since we will probably never truly know the capabilities of either navy's software. People like to call the 052C/D class China's "Aegis" warships, but are they really? We'll have to see.

Agreed completely. Which is why I said "in some ways". I expect software upgrades will eventually make full use of the 346As AESA, and a mature 346A will ultimately be more capable than a mature SPY-1D
But like you said, with all other things being equal, AESA is definitely preferred.

I think the aegis label is partly driven by the appearance of the arrays, partly by the air defence role.

In all honesty, aegis is can both a bland marketing term and an integrated multi ship combat system, and everything in between. So depending on how we define what an "aegis" ship is, 052C/D may be or may not be.

In terms of VLS flexibility, I see only the capability to cold launch as an additional benefit of the concentric launchers. But this could simply represent the PLAN's transition from cold launch to hot launch as its missile motors have presumably become more reliable, yet the existence of both hot and cold-launched rounds in the PLAN inventory necessitates this flexibility. A problem the USN does not have. Besides that, in terms of the range of rounds that can be fired, I don't see a difference.

The new VLS is also larger than Mk-41 and is even larger than Mk-57, which in turn allows ships equipped with in the new VLS to fire larger missiles, effectively future proofing it better than other smaller VLS.

Cold launch also means that they can afford to fire larger missiles which hot launch VLS may otherwise be unable to handle given there is a limit to which a cell can withstand the exhaust of a missile. Cold launch should get rid of this problem entirely by lighting the motor outside of the cell.

Of course, hot launch VLS can be modified to fire cold launch missiles, but that requires an add on which both increases weight and likely reduces the volume available inside the pre existing VLS tube, in turn reducing the size of the missile that can be cold launched in the first place.

(CCL VLS: 0.85 diameter, 9m long for largest variant. Mk-57 VLS: 0.71cm diameter, 7.19m long) mk-41 is of course even smaller than Mk-57 in terms of diameter)

 

[latenlazy]

That last point is the most significant because it speaks to China's intentions: how she sees herself projecting her power and protecting her interests. The pieces of the grand puzzle are falling into place.

That last point was also somewhat affirmed when we found out how big the Type 055 would be. There's almost no reason to field a destroyer of that size unless you needed the endurance.

 

[Blitzo]

2) The ability to assume tactical command of fleet, submarine, and air combat formations. Think USS Blue Ridge.

Well, many larger surface combatants have the ability to assume command roles, I wouldn't necessarily say 055 will be unique in that regard nor will it necessarily be as comprehensive or as specialized as the USS blue ridge is.


As for polar operations, I expect that is the PLAN thinking far afield and future proofing their ship class, just in case they ever do need to operate in that region. I expect any serious expeditions there of naval forces are years and years away yet.

 

[by78]

That last point was also somewhat affirmed when we found out how big the Type 055 would be. There's almost no reason to field a destroyer of that size unless you needed the endurance.

Right, and I simply found it interesting but not surprising per se. Capabilities inform intentions, to an extent, and I was more interested in what 055's capabilities may inform us about China's possible strategic intentions (i.e. protecting her far-flung commercial interests and shipping lanes).

 

[by78]

Well, many larger surface combatants have the ability to assume command roles, I wouldn't necessarily say 055 will be unique in that regard nor will it necessarily be as comprehensive or as specialized as the USS blue ridge is.


As for polar operations, I expect that is the PLAN thinking far afield and future proofing their ship class, just in case they ever do need to operate in that region. I expect any serious expeditions there of naval forces are years and years away yet.

I was merely pointing out that 055 is (possibly) the first Chinese DDG that has the ability to assume tactical command (of fleet and air assets). Larger combatants such as 071 can already perform that role, but to have it on a destroyer is something that's new for the PLAN, as far as I know.

I certainly find 055's 'versatility' interesting.

By the way, can Burkes assume tactical command of fleet and air formations?

 

[latenlazy]

Right, and I simply found it interesting but not surprising per se. Capabilities inform intentions, to an extent, and I was more interested in what 055's capabilities may inform us about China's possible strategic intentions (i.e. protecting her far-flung commercial interests and shipping lanes).

It's always nice when the logic that underpins your predictions are affirmed, especially in a field that is innately granted with less methodological rigour than a hard science

 

[Blitzo]

I was merely pointing out that 055 is (possibly) the first Chinese DDG that has the ability to assume tactical command (of fleet and air assets). Larger combatants such as 071 can already perform that role, but to have it on a destroyer is something that's new for the PLAN, as far as I know.

I certainly find 055's 'versatility' interesting.

By the way, can Burkes assume tactical command of fleet and air formations?

I believe Ticos can, and I bet burkes can as well. Most modern ships with datalinking capability and a well designed CIC should have the capacity to do so, to one degree or another.
I remember reading that even 054As have held "command" roles in exercises.

But this is obviously a fluid and continuous measure, and the word "command" itself is very vague.
Larger ships and more modern ships will tend to have greater utility for command, not only due to having either more equipment or more powerful equipment but also having the size to hold facilities for a relevant officer or flag officer and their staff.

So I wouldn't get too hung up on the idea that 055 can able to command groups of other assets, because this is something PLAN ships should have been able to do for years now. What is notable is the ship's size and relative expected advancement, which may allow it to do very well at the command role far more than previous ships.

 

[latenlazy]

Larger ships and more modern ships will tend to have greater utility for command, not only due to having either more equipment or more powerful equipment but also having the size to hold facilities for a relevant officer or flag officer and their staff.

And survivability.